It's a really great way to get fired quickly once someone finds out. You'll probably get sued by your employer as well to cover the electricity costs.

They've commented in antiwork and latestagecapitalism a few times

There would be accomplice charges, at least.

Since the "kid", and let's be clear, fetuses are not kids yet but let's use the term for the sake of getting the point across, has no agency because it's in "life support", it's the right of the mother to decide if she wants him to stay in that place or not. If she decides she doesn't want her kid, who can't speak for himself, to be in prison, then they have to free him. Otherwise it's a violation of his constitutional rights.

If fetuses are people, then they have rights. If they can't talk, then the parents reserve that exclusive right to speak on their behalf.

You can't have it both ways.

Absolute nonsense. If there was a magical way to transport the baby into a pod where it grew to maturity that would be awesome. Likewise there is no objection to inducing an early birth once the baby is considered viable.

It is about accepting that at a certain point, the baby has rights and should be afforded the most basic of protection, IE that we protect it from being killed.

I am fine with abortion prior to 12 weeks or when the health of the mother is physically threatend. After that it is a separate human being with a functional central nervous system and a heartbeat.

What is the alternative to killing a separate human being? I would love to hear of one.

"Thus the existence of Israel is totally denied and “Palestine” is regarded as covering the entirety of Israel."

Which is true, because "Israel" didn't even EXIST until after WW2.

Awww! Let's bomb them again then

Exactly. And conjoined twins should immune to all criminal penalties, unless it can be proven that both of them committed the crime. Preferably using DNA evidence.

I'm not sure there is any case law on this. Say if one conjoined twin snitched on the other, in exchange for a reduced sentence.

Have any of you read the article? They’re all obviously done by one person lol

Its just a fetus.

[deleted]

As I commented yesterday and the day before why is this being posted here every fucking day?

The McDonald’s in downtown Seattle on 3rd Ave is colloquially know as “McStabbys”

I’d pay good money to have Cookie Monster verbally assault me.

In my two week long experience, yes. Very much yes.

Yes. But involving parties without their consent is where it crosses the line.

This almost certainly could make it to SCOTUS and those imbeciles will need to further clarify their already incoherent reasoning in Dobbs. Should be fun.

>Some part of this fucker enjoyed having power, of doing it without their consent, and that’s never okay.

Also a fetish.

The child is effectively on temporary lifesupport, unable to express agency, and is currently a ward of the state.

Keeping the baby in the mother is the best care they can provide, anything else would actively endanger the child. Where the mother is makes no tangible difference in this case.

I understand that.

I don’t understand peeping your phone camera under stalls when the internet has so much quality filth easily available.

Some part of this fucker enjoyed having power, of doing it without their consent, and that’s never okay.

"we're bombing human beings 😵😱😱😱"

Easy really. The baby is effectively a ward of the state stuck on life support.

There is no way to remedy the situation, so i would be surprised if the supreme court even tackle that issue. It's rights is not being imposed upon in any tangential way, just like the mother is not illegally detaining the child by keeping it in her belly.

The baby is not incarcerated in any meaningful way. The baby is as free to walk as it can possibly be. The baby also don't have any agency, it is no different than how a comatose person has no agency to walk out of the room they are in, that does not make it a kidnapping.

There is no meaningful freedom available to it, so the government is not impeding on said freedom.

In fact, as the child is effectively on life support, the state is providing for it's rights in an actually tangential way by leaving it in the parent's belly.

Where i do think the lawyer absolutely has a point is in demanding OB Care which the mother was denied, The mother absolutely should have proper access to it because that is a right that meaningfully apply to both the baby and the mother herself.

Why the fuck did anyone think shopping around a collection of plates denying the existence of Israel as 'Crossing Borders' was a good idea?

Like, read the article. This wasn't just some kids artwork, shit was literally Palestinian flags over Jewish holy sites and passive aggressive denial of Judaism.

[removed]

there's no rule that says a dog can't be a police officer